cs.GT

arXiv:2412.11049v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We study the distributed facility location games with candidate locations, where agents on a line are partitioned into groups. Both desirable and obnoxious facility location settings are discussed. In distributed location problems, distortion can serve as a standard for quantifying performance, measuring the degree of difference between the actual location plan and the ideal location plan. For the desirable setting, under the max of sum cost objective, we give a strategyproof distributed mechanism with $5$-distortion, and prove that no strategyproof mechanism can have a distortion better than $\sqrt{2}+1$. Under the sum of max cost objective, we give a strategyproof distributed mechanism with $5$-distortion, and prove that no strategyproof mechanism can have a distortion better than $\frac{\sqrt{5}+1}{2}$. Under the max of max cost, we get a strategyproof distributed mechanism with $3$-distortion, and prove that no strategyproof mechanism can have a distortion better than $\frac{\sqrt{5}+1}{2}$. For the obnoxious setting, under three social objectives, we present that there is no strategyproof mechanism with bounded distortion in the case of discrete candidate locations, and no group strategyproof mechanism with bounded distortion in the case of continuous candidate locations.

arXiv:2305.16695v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We study a game-theoretic information retrieval model in which strategic publishers aim to maximize their chances of being ranked first by the search engine while maintaining the integrity of their original documents. We show that the commonly used Probability Ranking Principle (PRP) ranking scheme results in an unstable environment where games often fail to reach pure Nash equilibrium. We propose two families of ranking functions that do not adhere to the PRP principle. We provide both theoretical and empirical evidence that these methods lead to a stable search ecosystem, by providing positive results on the learning dynamics convergence. We also define the publishers' and users' welfare, demonstrate a possible publisher-user trade-off, and provide means for a search system designer to control it. Finally, we show how instability harms long-term users' welfare.

arXiv:2305.09065v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: A seller wants to sell an item to $n$ buyers. Buyer valuations are drawn i.i.d. from a distribution unknown to the seller; the seller only knows that the support is included in $[a, b]$. To be robust, the seller chooses a DSIC mechanism that optimizes the worst-case performance relative to the ideal expected revenue the seller could have collected with knowledge of buyers' valuations. Our analysis unifies the regret and the ratio objectives. For these objectives, we derive an optimal mechanism and the corresponding performance in quasi-closed form, as a function of the support information $[a, b]$ and the number of buyers $n$. Our analysis reveals three regimes of support information and a new class of robust mechanisms. i.) When $a/b$ is below a threshold, the optimal mechanism is a second-price auction (SPA) with random reserve, a focal class in earlier literature. ii.) When $a/b$ is above another threshold, SPAs are strictly suboptimal, and an optimal mechanism belongs to a class of mechanisms we introduce, which we call pooling auctions (POOL); whenever the highest value is above a threshold, the mechanism still allocates to the highest bidder, but otherwise the mechanism allocates to a uniformly random buyer, i.e., pools low types. iii.) When $a/b$ is between two thresholds, a randomization between SPA and POOL is optimal. We also characterize optimal mechanisms within nested central subclasses of mechanisms: standard mechanisms that only allocate to the highest bidder, SPA with random reserve, and SPA with no reserve. We show strict separations in terms of performance across classes, implying that deviating from standard mechanisms is necessary for robustness.

arXiv:2412.11122v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Collaborative machine learning (CML) provides a promising paradigm for democratizing advanced technologies by enabling cost-sharing among participants. However, the potential for rent-seeking behaviors among parties can undermine such collaborations. Contract theory presents a viable solution by rewarding participants with models of varying accuracy based on their contributions. However, unlike monetary compensation, using models as rewards introduces unique challenges, particularly due to the stochastic nature of these rewards when contribution costs are privately held information. This paper formalizes the optimal contracting problem within CML and proposes a transformation that simplifies the non-convex optimization problem into one that can be solved through convex optimization algorithms. We conduct a detailed analysis of the properties that an optimal contract must satisfy when models serve as the rewards, and we explore the potential benefits and welfare implications of these contract-driven CML schemes through numerical experiments.

arXiv:2402.02954v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: A recent theory shows that a multi-player decentralized partially observable Markov decision process can be transformed into an equivalent single-player game, enabling the application of \citeauthor{bellman}'s principle of optimality to solve the single-player game by breaking it down into single-stage subgames. However, this approach entangles the decision variables of all players at each single-stage subgame, resulting in backups with a double-exponential complexity. This paper demonstrates how to disentangle these decision variables while maintaining optimality under hierarchical information sharing, a prominent management style in our society. To achieve this, we apply the principle of optimality to solve any single-stage subgame by breaking it down further into smaller subgames, enabling us to make single-player decisions at a time. Our approach reveals that extensive-form games always exist with solutions to a single-stage subgame, significantly reducing time complexity. Our experimental results show that the algorithms leveraging these findings can scale up to much larger multi-player games without compromising optimality.

arXiv:2308.04399v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent advances in Machine Learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) follow a familiar structure: A firm releases a large, pretrained model. It is designed to be adapted and tweaked by other entities to perform particular, domain-specific functions. The model is described as `general-purpose,' meaning it can be transferred to a wide range of downstream tasks, in a process known as adaptation or fine-tuning. Understanding this process - the strategies, incentives, and interactions involved in the development of AI tools - is crucial for making conclusions about societal implications and regulatory responses, and may provide insights beyond AI about general-purpose technologies. We propose a model of this adaptation process. A Generalist brings the technology to a certain level of performance, and one or more Domain specialist(s) adapt it for use in particular domain(s). Players incur costs when they invest in the technology, so they need to reach a bargaining agreement on how to share the resulting revenue before making their investment decisions. We find that for a broad class of cost and revenue functions, there exists a set of Pareto-optimal profit-sharing arrangements where the players jointly contribute to the technology. Our analysis, which utilizes methods based on bargaining solutions and sub-game perfect equilibria, provides insights into the strategic behaviors of firms in these types of interactions. For example, profit-sharing can arise even when one firm faces significantly higher costs than another. After demonstrating findings in the case of one domain-specialist, we provide closed-form and numerical bargaining solutions in the generalized setting with $n$ domain specialists. We find that any potential domain specialization will either contribute, free-ride, or abstain in their uptake of the technology, and provide conditions yielding these different responses.

arXiv:2501.00052v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mean Field Control Games (MFCGs) provide a powerful theoretical framework for analyzing systems of infinitely many interacting agents, blending elements from Mean Field Games (MFGs) and Mean Field Control (MFC). However, solving the coupled Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman and Fokker-Planck equations that characterize MFCG equilibria remains a significant computational challenge, particularly in high-dimensional or complex environments. This paper presents a scalable deep Reinforcement Learning (RL) approach to approximate equilibrium solutions of MFCGs. Building on previous works, We reformulate the infinite-agent stochastic control problem as a Markov Decision Process, where each representative agent interacts with the evolving mean field distribution. We use the actor-critic based algorithm from a previous paper (Angiuli et.al., 2024) as the baseline and propose several versions of more scalable and efficient algorithms, utilizing techniques including parallel sample collection (batching); mini-batching; target network; proximal policy optimization (PPO); generalized advantage estimation (GAE); and entropy regularization. By leveraging these techniques, we effectively improved the efficiency, scalability, and training stability of the baseline algorithm. We evaluate our method on a linear-quadratic benchmark problem, where an analytical solution to the MFCG equilibrium is available. Our results show that some versions of our proposed approach achieve faster convergence and closely approximate the theoretical optimum, outperforming the baseline algorithm by an order of magnitude in sample efficiency. Our work lays the foundation for adapting deep RL to solve more complicated MFCGs closely related to real life, such as large-scale autonomous transportation systems, multi-firm economic competition, and inter-bank borrowing problems.

arXiv:2501.00191v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We study a networked economic system composed of $n$ producers supplying a single homogeneous good to a number of geographically separated markets and of a centralized authority, called the market maker. Producers compete \`a la Cournot, by choosing the quantities of good to supply to each market they have access to in order to maximize their profit. Every market is characterized by its inverse demand functions returning the unit price of the considered good as a function of the total available quantity. Markets are interconnected by a dispatch network through which quantities of the considered good can flow within finite capacity constraints. Such flows are determined by the market maker, who aims at maximizing a designated welfare function. We model such competition as a strategic game with $n+1$ players: the producers and the market game. For this game, we first establish the existence of Nash equilibria under standard concavity assumptions. We then identify sufficient conditions for the game to be potential with an essentially unique Nash equilibrium. Next, we present a general result that connects the optimal action of the market maker with the capacity constraints imposed on the network. For the commonly used Walrasian welfare, our finding proves a connection between capacity bottlenecks in the market network and the emergence of price differences between markets separated by saturated lines. This phenomenon is frequently observed in real-world scenarios, for instance in power networks. Finally, we validate the model with data from the Italian day-ahead electricity market.

arXiv:2501.00745v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The increasing integration of Large Language Model (LLM) based search engines has transformed the landscape of information retrieval. However, these systems are vulnerable to adversarial attacks, especially ranking manipulation attacks, where attackers craft webpage content to manipulate the LLM's ranking and promote specific content, gaining an unfair advantage over competitors. In this paper, we study the dynamics of ranking manipulation attacks. We frame this problem as an Infinitely Repeated Prisoners' Dilemma, where multiple players strategically decide whether to cooperate or attack. We analyze the conditions under which cooperation can be sustained, identifying key factors such as attack costs, discount rates, attack success rates, and trigger strategies that influence player behavior. We identify tipping points in the system dynamics, demonstrating that cooperation is more likely to be sustained when players are forward-looking. However, from a defense perspective, we find that simply reducing attack success probabilities can, paradoxically, incentivize attacks under certain conditions. Furthermore, defensive measures to cap the upper bound of attack success rates may prove futile in some scenarios. These insights highlight the complexity of securing LLM-based systems. Our work provides a theoretical foundation and practical insights for understanding and mitigating their vulnerabilities, while emphasizing the importance of adaptive security strategies and thoughtful ecosystem design.

arXiv:2501.00860v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The successive and the amendment procedures have been widely employed in parliamentary and legislative decision making and have undergone extensive study in the literature from various perspectives. However, investigating them through the lens of computational complexity theory has not been as thoroughly conducted as for many other prevalent voting procedures heretofore. To the best of our knowledge, there is only one paper which explores the complexity of several strategic voting problems under these two procedures, prior to our current work. To provide a better understanding of to what extent the two procedures resist strategic behavior, we study the parameterized complexity of constructive/destructive control by adding/deleting voters/candidates for both procedures. To enhance the generalizability of our results, we also examine a more generalized form of the amendment procedure. Our exploration yields a comprehensive (parameterized) complexity landscape of these problems with respect to numerous parameters.

arXiv:2501.00976v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In this paper, we study non-obvious manipulability (NOM), a relaxed form of strategyproofness, in the context of Hedonic Games (HGs) with Friends Appreciation (FA) preferences. In HGs, the aim is to partition agents into coalitions according to their preferences which solely depend on the coalition they are assigned to. Under FA preferences, agents consider any other agent either a friend or an enemy, preferring coalitions with more friends and, in case of ties, the ones with fewer enemies. Our goal is to design mechanisms that prevent manipulations while optimizing social welfare. Prior research established that computing a welfare maximizing (optimum) partition for FA preferences is not strategyproof, and the best-known approximation to the optimum subject to strategyproofness is linear in the number of agents. In this work, we explore NOM to improve approximation results. We first prove the existence of a NOM mechanism that always outputs the optimum; however, we also demonstrate that the computation of an optimal partition is NP-hard. To address this complexity, we focus on approximation mechanisms and propose a NOM mechanism guaranteeing a $(4+o(1))$-approximation in polynomial time. Finally, we briefly discuss NOM in the case of Enemies Aversion (EA) preferences, the counterpart of FA, where agents give priority to coalitions with fewer enemies and show that no mechanism computing the optimum can be NOM.

arXiv:2501.01111v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mechanism design in resource allocation studies dividing limited resources among self-interested agents whose satisfaction with the allocation depends on privately held utilities. We consider the problem in a payment-free setting, with the aim of maximizing social welfare while enforcing incentive compatibility (IC), i.e., agents cannot inflate allocations by misreporting their utilities. The well-known proportional fairness (PF) mechanism achieves the maximum possible social welfare but incurs an undesirably high exploitability (the maximum unilateral inflation in utility from misreport and a measure of deviation from IC). In fact, it is known that no mechanism can achieve the maximum social welfare and exact incentive compatibility (IC) simultaneously without the use of monetary incentives (Cole et al., 2013). Motivated by this fact, we propose learning an approximate mechanism that desirably trades off the competing objectives. Our main contribution is to design an innovative neural network architecture tailored to the resource allocation problem, which we name Regularized Proportional Fairness Network (RPF-Net). RPF-Net regularizes the output of the PF mechanism by a learned function approximator of the most exploitable allocation, with the aim of reducing the incentive for any agent to misreport. We derive generalization bounds that guarantee the mechanism performance when trained under finite and out-of-distribution samples and experimentally demonstrate the merits of the proposed mechanism compared to the state-of-the-art.

arXiv:2501.01389v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper investigates the design of optimal strategy revision in Population Games (PG) by establishing its connection to finite-state Mean Field Games (MFG). Specifically, by linking Evolutionary Dynamics (ED) -- which models agent decision-making in PG -- to the MFG framework, we demonstrate that optimal strategy revision can be derived by solving the forward Fokker-Planck (FP) equation and the backward Hamilton-Jacobi (HJ) equation, both central components of the MFG framework. Furthermore, we show that the resulting optimal strategy revision satisfies two key properties: positive correlation and Nash stationarity, which are essential for ensuring convergence to the Nash equilibrium. This convergence is then rigorously analyzed and established. Additionally, we discuss how different design objectives for the optimal strategy revision can recover existing ED models previously reported in the PG literature. Numerical examples are provided to illustrate the effectiveness and improved convergence properties of the optimal strategy revision design.

arXiv:2301.10632v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We study the problem of determining an envy-free allocation of indivisible goods among multiple agents with additive valuations. EFX, which stands for envy-freeness up to any good, is a well-studied relaxation of the envy-free allocation problem and has been shown to exist for specific scenarios. EFX is known to exist for three agents, and for any number of agents when there are only two types of valuations. EFX allocations are also known to exist for four agents with at most one good unallocated. In this paper, we show that EFX exists with at most k-2 goods unallocated for any number of agents having k distinct valuations. Additionally, we show that complete EFX allocations exist when all but two agents have identical valuations.

arXiv:2402.11437v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The classic paper of Shapley and Shubik \cite{Shapley1971assignment} characterized the core of the assignment game. We observe that a sub-coalition consisting of one player (or a set of players from the same side of the bipartition) can make zero profit, and therefore its profit under a core imputation can be an arbitrary amount. Hence an arbitrary core imputation makes {\em no fairness guarantee at the level of individual agents}. Can this deficiency be addressed by picking a ``good'' core imputation? To arrive at an appropriate solution concept, we give specific criteria for picking a special core imputation, and we undertake a detailed comparison of four solution concepts. Leximin and leximax core imputations come out as clear winners; we define these to be {\em equitable core imputations}. These imputations achieve ``fairness'' in different ways: whereas leximin tries to make poor agents more rich, leximax tries to make rich agents less rich. We give combinatorial strongly polynomial algorithms for computing these imputations via a novel adaptation of the classical primal-dual paradigm. The ``engine'' driving them involves insights into core imputations obtained via complementarity. It will not be surprising if our work leads to new uses of this powerful technique. Furthermore, we expect more work on computing the leximin and leximax core imputations of other natural games, in addition to the recent follow-up work \cite{Leximin-max}.

arXiv:2412.17890v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The number of Nash equilibria of the mixed extension of a generic finite game in normal form is finite and odd. This raises the question how large the number can be, depending on the number of players and the numbers of their pure strategies. Here we present a lower bound for the maximal possible number in the case of m-player games where each player has two pure strategies. It is surprisingly close to a known upper bound.

arXiv:2412.18140v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: How much value does a dataset or a data production process have to an agent who wishes to use the data to assist decision-making? This is a fundamental question towards understanding the value of data as well as further pricing of data. This paper develops an approach for capturing the instrumental value of data production processes, which takes two key factors into account: (a) the context of the agent's decision-making problem; (b) prior data or information the agent already possesses. We ''micro-found'' our valuation concepts by showing how they connect to classic notions of information design and signals in information economics. When instantiated in the domain of Bayesian linear regression, our value naturally corresponds to information gain. Based on our designed data value, we then study a basic monopoly pricing setting with a buyer looking to purchase from a seller some labeled data of a certain feature direction in order to improve a Bayesian regression model. We show that when the seller has the ability to fully customize any data request, she can extract the first-best revenue (i.e., full surplus) from any population of buyers, i.e., achieving first-degree price discrimination. If the seller can only sell data that are derived from an existing data pool, this limits her ability to customize, and achieving first-best revenue becomes generally impossible. However, we design a mechanism that achieves seller revenue at most $\log (\kappa)$ less than the first-best revenue, where $\kappa$ is the condition number associated with the data matrix. A corollary of this result is that the seller can extract the first-best revenue in the multi-armed bandits special case.

arXiv:2412.18601v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In the rapidly evolving landscape of GameFi, a fusion of gaming and decentralized finance (DeFi), there exists a critical need to enhance player engagement and economic interaction within gaming ecosystems. Our GameFi ecosystem aims to fundamentally transform this landscape by integrating advanced embodied AI agents into GameFi platforms. These AI agents, developed using cutting-edge large language models (LLMs), such as GPT-4 and Claude AI, are capable of proactive, adaptive, and contextually rich interactions with players. By going beyond traditional scripted responses, these agents become integral participants in the game's narrative and economic systems, directly influencing player strategies and in-game economies. We address the limitations of current GameFi platforms, which often lack immersive AI interactions and mechanisms for community engagement or creator monetization. Through the deep integration of AI agents with blockchain technology, we establish a consensus-driven, decentralized GameFi ecosystem. This ecosystem empowers creators to monetize their contributions and fosters democratic collaboration among players and creators. Furthermore, by embedding DeFi mechanisms into the gaming experience, we enhance economic participation and provide new opportunities for financial interactions within the game. Our approach enhances player immersion and retention and advances the GameFi ecosystem by bridging traditional gaming with Web3 technologies. By integrating sophisticated AI and DeFi elements, we contribute to the development of more engaging, economically robust, and community-centric gaming environments. This project represents a significant advancement in the state-of-the-art in GameFi, offering insights and methodologies that can be applied throughout the gaming industry.

arXiv:2412.18297v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We consider the problem of a learning agent who has to repeatedly play a general sum game against a strategic opponent who acts to maximize their own payoff by optimally responding against the learner's algorithm. The learning agent knows their own payoff function, but is uncertain about the payoff of their opponent (knowing only that it is drawn from some distribution $\mathcal{D}$). What learning algorithm should the agent run in order to maximize their own total utility? We demonstrate how to construct an $\varepsilon$-optimal learning algorithm (obtaining average utility within $\varepsilon$ of the optimal utility) for this problem in time polynomial in the size of the input and $1/\varepsilon$ when either the size of the game or the support of $\mathcal{D}$ is constant. When the learning algorithm is further constrained to be a no-regret algorithm, we demonstrate how to efficiently construct an optimal learning algorithm (asymptotically achieving the optimal utility) in polynomial time, independent of any other assumptions. Both results make use of recently developed machinery that converts the analysis of learning algorithms to the study of the class of corresponding geometric objects known as menus.

arXiv:2412.18074v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The Ethereum block production process has evolved with the introduction of an auction-based mechanism known as Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS), allowing validators to outsource block production to builders and reap Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) revenue from builder bids in a decentralized market. In this market, builders compete in MEV-Boost auctions to have their blocks selected and earn potential MEV rewards. This paper employs empirical game-theoretic analysis to explore builders' strategic bidding incentives in MEV-Boost auctions, focusing on how advantages in network latency and access to MEV opportunities affect builders' bidding behaviors and auction outcomes. Our findings confirm an oligopolistic dynamic, where a few dominant builders, leveraging their advantages in latency and MEV access, benefit from an economy of scale that reinforces their market power, leading to increased centralization and reduced auction efficiency. Our analysis highlights the importance of fair MEV distribution among builders and the ongoing challenge of enhancing decentralization in the Ethereum block building market.